UN Arms Trade Treaty Passes By Overwhelming Vote

The United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to approve the Arms Trade Treaty that would effectively regulate global trade in conventional weapons. For the first time this would link sales to the human-rights records of buyers.

The 193 countries represented voted as following: 154 to 3, with 23 abstentions. The three nations voting against it were Iran, Syria and North Korea.

Yes, Obama instructed that there should be support of the Arms Trade Treaty. However, almost two weeks ago, the US Senate voted in favor of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and with that, they voted in favor of national sovereignty. According to Jim Inhofe (R-OK) the measure is "to uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty."

The Washington Times reports,

American gun rights activists, though, insist the treaty is riddled with loopholes and is unworkable in part because it includes "small arms and light weapons" in its list of weaponry subject to international regulations. They do not trust U.N. assertions that the pact is meant to regulate only cross-border trade and would have no impact on domestic U.S. laws and markets.

Critics of the treaty were heartened by the U.S. Senate's resistance to ratifying the document, assuming President Obama sent it to the chamber for ratification. In its budget debate late last month, the Senate approved a non-binding amendment opposing the treaty offered by Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican, with eight Democrats joining all 45 Republicans backing the amendment.

Molon-Labe-United-NationsSenator Jerry Moran (R-KS) indicated that passing a treaty that countries like Iran, Syria and North Korea will ignore will simply tie the hands of countries like the United States. "The U.S. Senate is united in strong opposition to a treaty that puts us on level ground with dictatorships who abuse human rights and arm terrorists, but there is real concern that the Administration feels pressured to sign a treaty that violates our Constitutional rights," Mr. Moran said. "Given the apparent support of the Obama Administration for the Arms Trade Treaty, members of the U.S. Senate must continue to make clear that any treaty that violates our Second Amendment freedoms will be an absolute nonstarter for ratification."

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, we are pleased to join with the consensus" on the treaty, adding that before the White House gets to planning on how to get it through the Senate, it will first review and assess the language of the treaty itself."

However, Sen. Inhofe said, "It's time the Obama Administration recognizes [the treaty] is already a non-starter, and Americans will not stand for internationalists limiting and infringing upon their Constitutional rights. Furthermore, this treaty could also disrupt diplomatic and national security efforts by preventing our government from assisting allies like Taiwan, South Korea or Israel when they require assistance."

Neil MacFarquhar writes,

Treaty proponents pinned their hopes on a quick ratification by a large number of countries, anticipating that would put pressure on the large countries that abstained to ascribe to it as well. The proponents noted that all those abstaining countries had been willing to extend their consensus to the original treaty. But such significant abstentions could also signal that transforming the treaty into international law will be a more arduous process than if consensus had been achieved.

Vitaly I. Churkin, the Russian envoy to the United Nations, said Russian misgivings about what he called ambiguities in the treaty, including how terms like genocide would be defined, had pushed his government to abstain.

Support was particularly strong among many African countries — even if the compromise text was weaker than some had anticipated — with most governments asserting that over the long run the treaty would curb the arms sales that have fueled so many conflicts.

Nations can begin joining the treaty in early June, and it goes into effect as international law once 50 have ratified it. Given that the vote in the General Assembly was so overwhelmingly in support, it is expected to go into effect this year.

In the run-up to the vote on Tuesday, numerous states objected to the treaty because they said it was heavily weighted in favor of the exporters — allowing them to make subjective judgments about which states met the humanitarian guidelines. The treaty could be abused in the future as a means to foment unjust political pressure, said several countries, including Cuba, Nicaragua and Syria.

Erich Pratt, of Gun Owners of America, told Freedom Outpost that they think the good news in all of this is the support of the Senators in their previous vote. Pratt indicated that the opposition would have to muster another 21 votes in the Senate to ratify the treaty, which he did not see happening. "The writing's on the wall and this treaty isn't going anywhere in becoming law in the United States."

When asked if he thought Barack Obama might seek to implement the Arms Trade Treaty via executive order in the same manner that Bill Clinton implemented the United Nation's Agenda 21 via executive order, Pratt said, "I do think that is our biggest threat. We can definitely foresee that and he has definitely indicated that he is willing to do that as evidenced by the twenty-three executive actions he put forward two months ago."

"We could very easily see him wanting to implement the UN treaty through executive action and so if he does that, then here again, there's good news and bad news," Pratt continued. "The bad news is that we're going to have a fight on our hands. The good news is we have fifty-three senators and assumedly a majority of congressmen that would support defunding any executive action that would take."

Pratt seemed confident that if Obama goes down the road of executive order that there are the resources that can be brought into play to pull any teeth the executive order might have.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

Print pagePDF pageEmail page



  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Deutcher-Konig/100002606615002 Deutcher Konig

    How is it possible that Holder and Obama are not scheduled for trial for their collaboration and actions regarding "Fast and Furious"...for signing NDAA and for murdering thousands via capritious and arbitrary drone strikes??

    • bcollins39302

      Hmmm seeing as Obama was never implicated in Fast and Furious I don't see how they could be... Eric Holder definitely; he lied under oath and is totally incompetent.

  • susie mann

    Get us out of the UN!!!!!!!! I am 100% against His UN Gun Law. You got to be kidding!

  • susie mann

    Face Book said that I like the United nations trade laws.. Face book 's uses us to promote its own political agendas.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=742102668 Johnlene Kennedy

    impeach the sob hes a traiotor he his cause USA more harm them good look at whats happing now to the UAS

  • Spenserr

    Obama is a criminal.... Article II, §2, cl. 2, U.S. Constitution, says the President shall have Power, by and with the Advice and CONSENT of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur…

    The senate rejected the treaty, Obama doesn't have the consent of the senate. Obama should be impeached

  • jeremy

    want a real eye opener? Back in the 90s when Feinstein and company successfully got anti-gun legislation through congress, I used the Thomas Guide to Government to look up those members of congress who were the most rabidly anti-gun. Can you guess what RELIGION they all have in common? Can you guess what ETHNICITY they all have in common? Ashkenazi. (Khazars). Have a clue sheeple. Time to wake up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/roger.champagne2 Roger Champagne

    What are the names of the senators that voted for the U.N. gun treaty ????

  • WASP

    Who cares what the unelected criminals of the UN voted for or on. We should catch them in session, nail the doors shut, and burn the dump to the ground. If they jump, shoot them on the way down.

  • Knife10

    UN treaties have innocuous sounding titles but are intended to extend the scope of government over the lives of people. People who support the UN are not to be trusted in public office.

  • countyguard

    Why is Congress so stupid about "Executive Orders?" These are nothing regarding "making" law. These are simply restating the laws lawfully passed by Congress to the internal government as to how to deal with them. So... they are worthless to any of the sovereign People. We do NOT have to listen to any one of his tyrannical, unconstitutional attempts to "create " law. He's playing in his and sandbox, believing he's creating "laws" and throwing them out to the rest of us. I say, I'm not consenting to your delusions. They have no jurisdiction over the states... just federal government.

  • http://www.facebook.com/terry.corcoran2 Terry Corcoran

    My Congressional Rep is a drunk who made his fortune in telemarketing . His District is mostly abandoned and burnt out housing projects on the Northwest side of Atlanta. The people who used to live there are still on the voting rolls............

  • J J

    Any time that the UN is involved, the outcome can't be good. They can't be trusted!!!! They are working along with our own Democrat run federal government to destroy America!!!

  • TerryHuggles

    Great! Now we can line up the human rights record of Israel and stop feeding the troll nation its weapons of mass destruction.

  • d2arace

    the House of Representatives should impeach any one that brings this UN treaty forward anyone..and they need to start with the sec.of state and the UN ambassodor ...NOW

  • d2arace

    all traitors to the Constitution should be addressed as such...NO respect for any of them...NONE